Moral Argumentation: R.M. Hare's Dual-Level Approach to Handling Moral Complexity

Abstract

R.M. Hare, an authority in the philosophy of morals, established a persuasive framework for moral reasoning that continues to impact modern conversations about morals. This study suggests a structure of consequentialism that includes R.M. Hare's dual-level consequentialism. Hare believes that cause and effect is the most feasible when discriminating between two kinds of moral thinking, such as analytical (act consequence theory) and intuitive (rule consequence theory). According to his argument, consequences theory can justify intuitive level thinking when the critical level chooses the content. By gathering the condition of intuitive, prima facie principles, Hare's paradigm is consistent with Childress's four-principle approach. The method of four-principle complements is supported by a dual-level structure. We describe the fundamentals and four situations to support this integrative framework. We show that his integrative structure for the consequences is both tenable and convincing. In the following arguments, we will look at R.M. Hare's dual-level model of moral reasoning, including its essential elements, strengths, objections, and consequences for modern moral theory.